The time is to do with how much traction the car has, how quickly it can change gear.

The speed is down to power and vehicle mass.

You can have a slow ET and a high terminal speed. I have seen cars run mid 12's with a terminal of just over 100mph but have also seen cars run mid 12's with a terminal of 110+mph its all down to the first 60 feet in drag racing.

The time is to do with how much traction the car has, how quickly it can change gear.

The speed is down to power and vehicle mass.

You can have a slow ET and a high terminal speed. I have seen cars run mid 12's with a terminal of just over 100mph but have also seen cars run mid 12's with a terminal of 110+mph its all down to the first 60 feet in drag racing.

"The pit lane closes 15 minutes prior to the formation lap. Any drivers still in the pit lane at this time will have to start the race from there. "

"However, the cars are deemed to be under parc ferme conditions for a much longer period - from the time they first exit the pits during qualifying until the start of the formation lap
immediately prior to the race."

I remember in 2003 when they had to qualify with their race fuel, Webber elected to start from pitlane and add fuel. Because the race was red flagged (aborted start with Da Matta?) Webber got a drive through for breaking parc ferme conditions. Thats how I remember it anyway?

And yes, fueling was only allowed after the cars properly took off, seeing a pit crew ready with a fuel hose waiting around their car for the lights to go g.. out was a relatively common sight in the refueling days.

I remember in 2003 when they had to qualify with their race fuel, Webber elected to start from pitlane and add fuel. Because the race was red flagged (aborted start with Da Matta?) Webber got a drive through for breaking parc ferme conditions. Thats how I remember it anyway?

Yes, during the Austrian Grand Prix. He still finished in the points and beat his team-mate.

1) Is that a little face in the front of vettel's car? (The yellow nose tip)

2) Why on slow motions (Im referring to the ones done by Speed TV atm) does it look like the wheel spins way faster corresponding to the movement over the track?

Thanks!

2) It's called wheel slip, every wheel will do this - that is what causes tyre wear - the more it slips the more it wears away. The tyres do not provide enough grip with the road so that it's like an exaggerated version of driving on ice!

It seems like Graham Hill was the fist driver who used this term for a circuit when talking about the Le Mans Bugatti circuit where the French Grand Prix (or GP de l'ACF) took place in 1967. But in one of the threads mentioned we can read that the term was already used this way in 1963 by the drivers for a part of the Mexico City circuit - "the Mickey Mouse section".

The term "Mickey Mouse" is commonly used for circuits that have a lot of artificial twists and turns making it look more like a go-kart track than a Grand Prix track. Originally there was another meaning as well: a second or third rate circuit like cheap "Mickey Mouse" watches used to be.

Why did Mclaren apply teamorders in Jerez, 1997? Why did Coulthard have to let Hakkinen through? I just read that he didn't understand it either, and he negotiated for several laps about it, but in the end he still did it.

Why did Mclaren apply teamorders in Jerez, 1997? Why did Coulthard have to let Hakkinen through? I just read that he didn't understand it either, and he negotiated for several laps about it, but in the end he still did it.

Some say it was a gift from Ron Dennis because he felt guilt for the accident Mika suffered in 1995. It was the first year McLaren had a winning car since 1993 and only Coulthard had won races until then so it makes sense they let Hakkinen win the last one.

See, Caterham, Marussia and HRT often (ahem, always) qualify on the back of the grid anyway. And the penalty of using too many engines, is a grid penalty. So for them the penalty is so little, why don't they just supercharge their engines, so they last only one race? Maybe then they could get closer to the points from the back of the grid.

See, Caterham, Marussia and HRT often (ahem, always) qualify on the back of the grid anyway. And the penalty of using too many engines, is a grid penalty. So for them the penalty is so little, why don't they just supercharge their engines, so they last only one race? Maybe then they could get closer to the points from the back of the grid.

Stupid question?

Among other things because engines are very expensive. If McLaren has to "face" soon the payment of the Mercedes engines, and that's something they are taking into consideration, for example, while negotiating the driver's new contracts, imagine how much it would mean for HRT to pay 3 times what they pay now for engines.

And also because, even if they are not fighting for points, they are fighting for positions in the constructors championship. Making your life hard at the beginning of every race is not necessarily the best way to win the Catherham/Marussia/HRT championship. It would be arguable if a newer engine compensates beginning from further back or not.

See, Caterham, Marussia and HRT often (ahem, always) qualify on the back of the grid anyway. And the penalty of using too many engines, is a grid penalty. So for them the penalty is so little, why don't they just supercharge their engines, so they last only one race? Maybe then they could get closer to the points from the back of the grid.

Stupid question?

Rather Even when they're sent to the back of the grid, cars have to conform to all regulations.

Alright - but well, probably teams will make their engines run full revs anyway this weekend, for they don't have to run any longer after Sunday afternoon
just saying; any new team might as well take a 'free' fresh engine, since the grid penalty is non-existent.

Alright - but well, probably teams will make their engines run full revs anyway this weekend, for they don't have to run any longer after Sunday afternoonjust saying; any new team might as well take a 'free' fresh engine, since the grid penalty is non-existent.

I think advantage of new engine is not that big - it's still meets the same specs. It may be marginally more powerful due to less wear, but not by much.

Alright - but well, probably teams will make their engines run full revs anyway this weekend, for they don't have to run any longer after Sunday afternoonjust saying; any new team might as well take a 'free' fresh engine, since the grid penalty is non-existent.

to get a "free" engine they will have to run their other engines for longer. Engine deals are for 8 engines per car per season, they are not get as many engines as you want per season. And back of the grid teams generally lack the money to go and buy a new engine just so they can be 2 tenths quicker in Brazil (which by the way would have little to no effect in their grid position)

Alright - but well, probably teams will make their engines run full revs anyway this weekend, for they don't have to run any longer after Sunday afternoonjust saying; any new team might as well take a 'free' fresh engine, since the grid penalty is non-existent.

The reason the whole 8 engine rule exists in the first place is to stop the richer teams from doing what you suggest because it was pricing everyone else out of any chance of being competitive.

The teams at the back are generally there due to lack of funds. It simply wouldn't be financially possible for them to do it.

Some say it was a gift from Ron Dennis because he felt guilt for the accident Mika suffered in 1995. It was the first year McLaren had a winning car since 1993 and only Coulthard had won races until then so it makes sense they let Hakkinen win the last one.

Also Hakkinen had been leading a number of races that year when his engine would go boom.

I have a stupid question: Since when F1 teams use those weird measuring devices attached to the cars during free practices? After what happened with Massa in 2009, isn't it dangerous if some piece falls from the car?

Let's say Vettel is in third position, and Alonso retires from 5th place. Would they tell Vettel on the radio that Alonso is out? Cause that would make Vettel world champion and I'm not sure if it's good for your car control when you just realise that.

Yeah I don't see why not. He seems generally aware of what's going on with his rivals the rest of the time so I imagine he'd cope. Last year at Japan he would have known he was doing enough well before the finish.

Let's say Vettel is in third position, and Alonso retires from 5th place. Would they tell Vettel on the radio that Alonso is out? Cause that would make Vettel world champion and I'm not sure if it's good for your car control when you just realise that.

They would but probably not while he was negotiating the S-bends. There's a few good reasons why they put pitboards out on the straight.

I have a stupid question: Since when F1 teams use those weird measuring devices attached to the cars during free practices? After what happened with Massa in 2009, isn't it dangerous if some piece falls from the car?

Since the testing ban, at least as far as we get to see it. I think McLaren was the first to figure out that the ban meant data acquisition is needed during official sessions, and I do believe that at least the sophistication of the rigs was increased following the ban, though I seem to remember Ferrari running their tower on the airbox even before the testing ban.

Why did Mclaren apply teamorders in Jerez, 1997? Why did Coulthard have to let Hakkinen through? I just read that he didn't understand it either, and he negotiated for several laps about it, but in the end he still did it.

If there was no conspiracy... They might have thought that faster Häkkinen had a better shot at catching Villeneuve. In the end he took the lead with just 4 corners to go and Coulthard made his pass in the last corner.

Why are racing cars in 1950's photographs warped in a way that the top half of the car is further forward than bottom half?

That's called rolling shutter effect. It appears because frame is not exposed completely at once - rather shutter moves across the frame briefly exposing different parts of image. This means different part of frame are actually exposed at different time and result high speed object will move between those exposures.